Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Home Blog Freedom Potentials The Cross Roads Veritas Books
OnTarget Archives Newtimes Survey Podcast Library Video Library PDF Library
Actionist Corner YouTube Video Channel BitChute Video Channel Brighteon Video Channel Social Credit Library

On Target

28 June 2013 Thought for the Week:

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
- - Voltaire (1694-1778

“I am not afraid, because this is the choice I’ve made.”
- - Edward Snowden, June 2013

“Cowards die many times before their deaths. The valiant never taste of death but once.”
- - Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar", Act 2 scene 2


The Hon. Anthony Albanese, Minister for Local Government, has announced to the Local Government Association that the government will provide 10 million dollars to the YES and NO cases. However, in a despotic move, worthy of the tactics of Stalinist Russia, to severely handicap any opposition to the government proposals, it appears that the NO case will receive only 5% ($500,000) and the YES case will receive $9.5 million.

It is an absolute disgrace that an Australian government will act in such an authoritarian manner, both in rushing through important constitutional change without giving the people time to absorb the potential implications thereof and now in allocating taxpayer monies in such an inequitable fashion. We can only hope that the electorate will see through this political gerrymandering of the referendum system.

- - Philip Benwell, National Chair Australian Monarchist League

13 weeks to go until the election and possible referendum, and the referendum bill still hasn't gone before the Senate. There is not enough time for the people of Australia to properly review the pros on cons of the proposal. On that basis alone the bill should not be passed.
Contact your state Senators and let them know your thoughts!
A senator is a member of the Australian Senate, elected to represent a state or territory. There are 76 senators, 12 from each state and two each from the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.  


by Louis Cook
Understanding the role of the Australian Constitution and the part it plays in securing our freedom is essential but a sadly neglected part of general education. In-depth education of Australian political history has been replaced with shallow instruction in ‘political science’ or more aptly ‘brainwashing’ to fulfil a socialist objective by perversion of history. Like a plant cut off from its roots, ‘free’ Australia will tend to wither and die if a Yes vote is secured in September.

When a new body or group is formed, Articles of Incorporation are written by the participating parties and made public when filed with the state. Those articles of incorporation set forth who is forming the group, the purpose and function of the body being formed, the activities in which it may engage — its name and its duration.

Articles of incorporation are written and filed to establish an organization, business, etc. The group then writes a constitution and by-laws to spell out how the purposes as set forth in the articles of incorporation will be carried out. In law, the constitution and by-laws and activities of an organisation cannot go beyond the purposes set forth in its articles of incorporation. To do so can result in the organization losing its corporate charter and its right to operate.

To change a constitution requires an overwhelming majority of support and this gives security and a feeling of permanence to all participants of the organisation. A constitution should not be seen as a ‘living document’ which can be easily changed to reflect current mores or arbitrary whims.

Changes to by-laws can usually accomplish these alterations so long as they reflect the general spirit of the organisation and satisfy its members. A constitution should be somewhat like ‘Natural Law’ with ‘laws of gravity’ or laws of physics, etc., where humans must work in harmony with these laws or suffer the consequences for deviation from these laws.

The Australian Constitution was a construct of the participating States who insisted on overwhelming support by those to whom it applied and put to a referendum of the people for endorsement. It was a massive task at the time and we now enjoy the fruits of the far-sighted leaders and their purposeful undertaking. 

The Preamble sets forth who is forming the group
“Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established:

And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen:

Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: -

1. This Act may be cited as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act.” Section 5 of the Preamble goes on to say:
This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, not-withstanding anything in the laws of any State; and the laws of the Commonwealth shall be in force on all British ships, the Queen’s ships of war excepted, whose first port of clearance and whose port of destination are in the Commonwealth.

The Preamble is the introduction to the Constitution and the final section reads: -
9. The Constitution of the Commonwealth shall be as follows: - And so it goes… there are eight chapters and 128 sections defining the powers of the Commonwealth and in general limiting the ‘grasping hands’ of politicians who have a ‘will to power’. The Constitution is easily read and if you don’t have a copy then contact your federal Representative and request a copy be sent to you along with any other information to help you understand its implications for you.

Chapter VIII. Section 128. Defines ‘Alteration Of The Constitution’
128. This Constitution shall not be altered except in the following manner: - … And if in a majority of the States a majority of the electors voting approve the proposed law, and if a majority of all the electors voting also approve the proposed law, it shall be presented to the Governor-General for the Queen’s assent…”

The framers of the Constitution bequeathed a document to us that has given over 100 years of political stability when much of the world has been in turmoil and now Australia is the place of choice for immigrants and refugees.

The September referendum proposals will not add to this stability, indeed, they could undermine it which is likely the intention of the proposers’ for change.
It is an abrogation of responsibilities by the constituent states if local government funding is in a parlous condition and it is here a solution should be found, not by the proposed changes to the Constitution.

On September 14th Australian voters will be at the ‘cross-roads’, not only with a choice of who will govern for the next term of government but whether to accept changes to the Constitution that will have far reaching and uncertain effects on our future.
If you have any doubts whatsoever then you must reject any alteration with a resounding NO VOTE.

Do not hand any more power to Canberra! NO, NO, NO!  


by Peter Ewer
For those readers out there who hope that the Liberal Party, headed by Tony Rabbit will save Anglo Saxon Australia, consider:

“Liberal Party Swats the Wasp (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) Type with ‘More Inclusive’ Approach” (The Daily Telegraph 11 May 2013).
Tony Rabbit has proclaimed that the Liberal Party will now be “more inclusive” as it fields a “record number of ethnic candidates” and abandons its WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) tradition. It will field 21 candidates from racial backgrounds such as Thai, Filipino, Vietnamese, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Lebanese, Taiwanese, Korean – you name it. As well the Liberals are “reaching out” to “recently arrived migrants”.

Most importantly the Labor Party fears that it is losing its traditional migrant/ethnic voting bloc and that the Liberals are muscling in. Record dollars are being spent to regain the sacred migrant/ethnic vote. Abbott the rabbit, who in 1990 published an article expressing concern about the way immigration was changing the ethnic/racial profile of Australia said that Labor’s crackdown on 457 skilled migration visas “was a key reason Labor was losing its traditional migrant support base”. Incredible!

The only thing Gillard did right was to at least raise attention to the 457 visa rorts. Of course, this was all show as secret fast tracking of 457 visas allowed “the nation’s most regular users of foreign workers “unfettered” access to the programme in a move said to undermine the government’s crackdown. (The Australian 4 June 2013, p.5)

Abbott, however, hasn’t even put on a show of standing up to the 457 rorts mentioned by Gillard and you can be certain that the party of Big Business will give the globalist elites the reserve army of cheap coloured exploitable labour they require.

I note in passing that so-called conservative journalist Janet Albrechtsen (The Australian 5 June 2013, p.10) takes the Labor Party and Gillard to task for their “gender wars”, but she is silent about the ethno-racial cultural war against traditional Anglo-Australia which the Liberals and Labor are jointly engaged in. In fact, the Liberal Party under Robert Menzies did its bit in working with Labor to destroy the White Australia Policy and to encourage non-British migration after the end of WWII, in co-operation with Fabian Socialists such as Arthur Calwell.

Malcolm Fraser brought in tens of thousands of Asian “refugees” and John Howard, after disarming Australian citizens brought in an Asian ruling class through large-scale Asian immigration as described in The Howard Legacy (available from the League Book Services and Veritas Books online for $25.00 plus postage).

Oz Conservative: Who does Tony Abbott call the most worthy Australians?
Abbott’s speech given at a multicultural meeting organised by the Liberal Party in April was not quoted in full in the media, perhaps because it was too provocative. The Oz Conservative (11 May 2013, at points out that Abbott’s speech says explicitly that migrants are superior to native-Australians: I want to tell you that if all our candidates are successful, by far the most common surname in the Liberal Party Room will be Nguyen. People who have come to this country from many parts of Asia; who have come, worked hard, prospered, succeeded and become first-class Australians – that is the face of modern Australia.” And it gets even worse:

“I want to say how brave every single migrant to this country is, because every single one of you has done something that those who are native born have never done. You have been gutsy enough to take your future in your own hands and got to a country which is not yours and make it your own.” Logic Mr. Rabbitt, Logic – what if everybody in the world played this musical chairs – the whole of civilisation would fall apart. Migrants do well because they go to places where everything is all set up for them and where they have the opportunity to do well and literally take over the country from the native-born. You don’t see Abbott’s migrants going to Africa , do you? Or Haiti?

Finally, Abbott said that migrants “make the very best Australian citizens eventually. They are the most worthy, the most welcome parts of the Australian family…” Excuse me Mr. Rabbit, are migrants “better” and more “worthy” than Aborigines? What a pity there is never the opportunity to put you on the spot in public on these sorts of questions.

Both the right-liberal and the left-liberal philosophies are anti-Anglo and destructive of our race, culture and nation. In the election it is necessary to defeat ethnic Liberal candidates – even if it means voting Labor in that electorate if the Labor candidate is not ethnic. In essence, there is very little difference between these parties, so it really doesn’t matter who wins the election - so long as none of these stupid evil parties has too much power.

Both parties need to be taught a lesson. The best result will be a knife-edge result with all the politically correct independents losing their seats, being replaced by Katter candidates, who are better than Liberals and Labor. That will deliver a message.

It will be good to see “Anglo” Tony Abbott replaced by someone like Joe Hockey which should be consistent with his multicultural philosophy. In fact, he should resign immediately as Opposition leader and allow an ethnic, preferably an Asian migrant, take his place. Show us how “inclusive” you are Tony!

Writing “REDUCE IMMIGRATION” on your ballot paper is essential.

Beyond that, we need to begin the long hard process of regaining our racial identity and like other ethno-racial groups, “think racially and inclusive”. This will not be easy because our people have been deracinated. But, many of the writers at this site have started the process of regaining ourselves and our race. Nationalist concerns about “Australia” are no longer of any relevance – the ethnic tide is now too deep. Our concerns should be with saving our ethnic group, our Tribe.

Psssst.... Have you looked at Australia’s Debt Clock lately?


from Wallace Klinck, Canada
I would recommend that you visit Professor Guy Standing's page at the University of Bath, Department of Social and Policy Sciences. Prof. Standing has written a new book titled "The Precariat", meaning, of course, the new and growing class of people without stable incomes, leading a more and more precarious economic existence under the unstable conditions of an evermore fluid workforce, serving an increasingly globalized financial and production system.

Apparently he has been asked to present in about twenty countries. His book is available at a discounted price directly from the author. His e-mail address is provided on the site page.

Financial Powers want an increasingly decultured, despiritualzed mobile mass to Serve Them
Without having read his book, I would infer that its thesis more or less coincides with the Social Credit idea of the Financial Powers desiring an increasingly de-cultured, de-spiritualized mobile mass proletariat to serve their materialistic policy of world-wide power-centralization.

The Precariat: The new dangerous class - Sydney Ideas (The University of Sydney) Video:

Why the precariat requires a basic income (Prof. Guy Standing) (ENG) Video:


Former High Court Justice Ian Callinan on the local government referendum, by Julie Novak. 11 June 2013, Constitutional Preservation: The Samuel Griffith Society, formed in 1992, is a group dedicated to upholding the principles of the Australian Constitution, including to defend its integrity against proposals to diminish the constitutional fabric by centralising power in Canberra. The President of the Society, Ian Callinan AC, QC, released an important statement regarding the proposal local government referendum:

All Australians should resist the proposal for a referendum to amend the Constitution to constitute local authorities as constitutional polities. The proposal will, if adopted, enable the Commonwealth government to side line the states and divide and rule a multiplicity of clamouring councils swollen in ego and, inevitably in bureaucracy.
Anyone who would believe that local autonomy and democracy will be enhanced would be delusional. Instead, the flow of funds and accordingly the preference for project over project, and their implementation will be micro-managed by Canberra.
The marginalised states will be denied the capacity to design and implement the infrastructure that the states require, and, in addition to the demarcation disputes in the High Court between the states and the Commonwealth, there will be endless litigation between the states, the Commonwealth and the new empowered local authorities as to who is entitled to do what and equally importantly, where.
Vote yes at your peril

NO Summary: On 14 September a referendum will be held to amend the Constitution to allow the Federal government to directly fund local government. Australians will be asked to insert a mere 17 news words into the Constitution that limits the power of Canberra. Politicians are arguing that change is “small” and “practical”, but it is not. Adding these few words will turn our democracy on its head, and open the doors to a massive power grab by Canberra politicians and bureaucrats to direct local services.

It Isn’t Necessary: Canberra can already fund local government through the States. This referendum removes a level of scrutiny and accountability of how our money is spent to make sure local communities get what they need.

It’s a Canberra Power Grab: By attaching strings to direct funding Canberra bureaucrats and politicians will be constitutionally entitled to direct what local services are provided, and local infrastructure is built, in every community across the country. Canberra is responsible for issues that impact the entire nation, they don’t understand what is going on in our backyard.

It Will Harm Local Services: When decisions are made by Canberra bureaucrats and politicians about local services and infrastructure it’s based on Canberra’s priorities, and not community need. That’s why we got duplicated school halls and the dangerous pink batts scheme.

It’s Bad for Local Government: Cash-strapped Mayors will be bullied through funding agreements and told to spend money in line with Canberra policies and priorities, not what is good for our local communities. The Prime Minister will hold all the cards in the funding deck.

Political Buck Passing Will Get Worse: The current buck-passing between Canberra and the States is based on the tied funding agreements that Canberra now wants to be imposed on every single Council and Shire across the country. Rates Will Go Up: Every string attached to Canberra’s funding will add layers of extra costs and regulations onto local government. Those costs will be paid for through local service cuts or rate increases.

It’s Bad for Australia: Our system of government isn’t perfect, but it has helped us build the best country on earth to live in. We shouldn’t be removing Constitutional restrictions that hold Canberra politicians and bureaucrats to account unless there is a exceptional need. This referendum isn’t necessary, and will have dangerous unintended consequences harming local communities if it is passed.
[The statement also linked to the website of the official ‘No’ case for the referendum 


“Barack Obama could end up doing more for the cause of small government than Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek and the Tea Party put together. Last week's revelations about surveillance by the United States government of the phone records of millions of Americans would have been a major story at any time. But this has a special significance because it follows in the wake of a series of scandals involving the Obama administration's abuse of political power and the abuse of confidential information.

The president's supporters excuse these previous scandals on the basis that government is now so big, politicians can't control what bureaucrats do… Australians should pay close attention to what's occurring in America. At least in that country there's a public debate about government surveillance of its citizens. There's no such similar debate here.

Last year at an Australian parliamentary inquiry when Chris Berg and Simon Breheny of the Institute of Public Affairs said the federal government should not force technology companies to monitor the phone and internet records of every single Australian, Labor MP Michael Danby accused them of taking a "one-eyed view of extreme civil liberties".

That was a revealing comment from Danby. It shows the world has changed. It is now an "extreme" view of "civil liberty" to argue the government, and people like James Clapper who work for the government, should not automatically have access to your phone or computer.” (emphasis added…ed)  


by Chris Knight
“China’s Long March to an Excellent Drop” (The Australian, April 2, 2013, p.6) tells how Chinese viticulturists are visiting Australian wine areas to learn the tricks of the trade. I ask: why would Australians want to do this? Why help the Chinese setup their wine making industries? It is the same pattern that we have seen with technology and reverse engineering. Give it another 20 years and the Australian wine industry will be gone, like our manufacturing. We just can’t be warm, fuzzy and liberal enough, it seems.  


by James Reed
No, we are definitely not the “funny money” people – it is the Establishment which is. For, the Establishment holds to economic fatalism, that mass unemployment and a crashing standard of living is inevitable. Not so says Adair Turner, chairman of Britain’s Financial Services Authority and one of the world’s leading financial policy makers.
He follows economists such as John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman, who both thought newly created money, given to citizens, would kick start economies. Milton Friedman suggested dropping such money out of helicopters, but of course, an electronic transfer today would be more efficient.

Anatole Kaletskey argues that this distribution of free money in the United States would be more effective than the present practice of the U.S. Federal Reserve printing billions of dollars of money each month and distributing it to banks and Wall Street investors through its purchase of government bonds.
That policy may warm the pockets of the financial elite, but does less to revive employment. “Free money” is a strong first step along the road to the national dividend that would itself remove the tyranny of economic deprivation that hangs over workers in the capitalist economy.  


by Ian Wilson LL. B.
Mark Wilson, “Dealing with Hypocrites in the Human Rights Industry”, Endeavour, April 7, 2013, p.8, deals with the story of his complaint to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) over an article published in The Australian which Mr Wilson believed vilified those of Anglo-Celtic decent worldwide.

What is of interest to us here is that Mr Wilson rung up HREOC to find out how to make a complaint and was told that there were no indigenous Britons, and that the Federal Court in McLeod v Power (2003) had found that “White” “is not descriptive of any particular or homogenous ethnic, national or racial group; nor is it a term of abuse applied to an oppressed groups” (i.e. the majority), just doesn’t count. In any case, McLeod v Power involved offensive words by an Aboriginal woman to a prison guard, referring to “white”. Mr Wilson rightly notes that if the situation was transposed and the word “black” was used, well, things would be different then.

Ultimately HREOC terminated Mr Wilson’s complaint. He concluded his article by saying that “In the land of the ethnic supremacists, anti-racism is merely code for anti-white”. Indeed, this was a valuable lesson for those out there who still believe that “the Law” is a neutral arbitrator.  


from Gilad Atzmon's website, 15 June, 2013

The Lab from Yotam Feldman on Vimeo

"The Lab" is a new groundbreaking Israeli documentary film that redefines our entire understanding of the Jewish State, its aims, its identity and its global destructive role. I honestly believe that this film is the deepest and most important commentary on Israel.

In "The Lab", Director Yotam Feldman exposes the Israeli military industry and its operation, he interviews some major protagonists within Israel’s ‘security’ trade. He elaborates on the role of the industry within the Israeli society and economy - in the last few years Israeli security exports reached an unprecedented level of $7 billion a year. A full 20% of Israeli exports are military or military related. Approximately 150,000 families in Israel are dependent on that industry. Israel is now the fourth biggest military exporter.

In the last decade, every Israeli military operation led to an immediate sharp increase in sales of Israeli military export around the world: weaponry, systems, intelligence, strategies, doctrines, knowledge and experience.
Feldman provides us with a glimpse into a very organized universe. We visit Israeli weapon fairs around the world but we also see arenas filled to capacity with foreign generals, public officials and diplomats. They are all shopping for Israeli military products.
The message is clear, the 7 billion dollars is just part of the story. Israeli military elite is now deeply interwoven with the political and military elite of every country around the globe. This emerging Israeli business buys the Jewish state influence and support.

Watch Foreign Generals shopping around

Foreign Generals – A Segment from The Lab
"The Lab" makes it evidently clear that the Palestinian civilian population in the West Bank and Gaza have become test subjects for Israeli tactics, weaponry and fighting philosophy (‘Fighting Torah’, Torat Lechima - as the Israelis call it). The destruction of the Palestinians has now been transformed into a very profitable industry. We are dealing here with nothing short of highly calculated murder.

Through a set of fascinating interviews, Feldman conveys a very genuine picture of the Israeli death merchants. Feldman lets them talk, he hardly interferes. They are sharp, they are genuine, they are even funny at times, occasionally witty, and a few of them, might even be charming if you did not know who they are. But make no mistake, they are sinister, some of them are clearly psychotic, they are mass murderers and they are free. They sell destruction and havoc and do it very successfully.

Watch IDF Yoav Galant, the planner and executioner of Operation Cast Lead, discussing ‘proportions’: Being myself an Israeli-born and raised successful musician and writer, I think I can recognize Israeli dedication, perseverance and creativity when I see it, no matter into what service it is pressed. (Perhaps I was lucky to be rescued by bebop.) Those Israeli death angels’ talent is driven into the amplification of human misery. The consequences are tragic.

Game Changer It is far from being a secret that a century of Palestinian struggle led to practically nothing. The state of the Palestinian solidarity movement is even more embarrassing. Feldman's "The Lab" is a game changer, for it can explain decades of impotence.
We are immersed in flawed terminology - ‘colonialism’, ‘apartheid’, ‘conflict’, ‘solution’, ‘Zionism’ are just few examples. Gaza is now a vast Laboratory - the Israelis are the ‘scientists’ and the ‘technicians’, the Palestinians are the ‘guinea pigs’. Watching "The Lab" must lead all of us to fundamentally question our notions. We are dealing with a premeditated war crime.

The notion of resolution (as in ‘two-state solution’), for instance, is not applicable. It is clear beyond doubt that in the real world the ‘scientist’ does not negotiate with the ‘guinea pig’. The ‘scientist’ also doesn’t consider sharing reality with his ‘guinea pig’ in a ‘one democratic state.’

"The Lab" is a glimpse into the Israeli mind: you clearly do not find much compassion there. For decades we were foolish to examine the success and failure of Israeli military operations in reference to Israeli military and political ‘objectives,’ as we surmised them. We were clearly wrong. As we learn from Feldman’s film, the real objective of Israeli operations may as well be examining new doctrines and operational systems in order to distribute them around the world soon after. Ehud Barak, for instance, wasn’t exactly the most sophisticated Israeli minister of defense, he clearly failed to defend his people or even make them feel secure. However, he was very successful in selling Israeli weapons and doctrines.

Tel Aviv being subject to a barrage of Qassam rockets may be seen by Israelis as devastating news, but from a military industrial point of view, it was a golden opportunity to examine and promote the Israeli anti-missile system Iron Dome. If I am correct here, it becomes clear that like the Palestinians, more and more Israelis are also becoming ‘guinea pigs’ in this ever growing military laboratory.

One may wonder how and when "the Zionist dream" transformed itself into a military business. Only a few of us, writers and scholars, have attempted to answer this question. The transformation of the Jewish State into an oppression factory is apparently a direct outcome of Israel’s supremacist ideology. If we want to understand what is happening in the Jewish State, we must first grasp the notions of choseness, Jewishness and Jewish identity politics.

I guess that enough Palestinians in Gaza do realise by now that they have been part of an Israeli experiment. Every too often we learn from Palestinian doctors that while treating casualties of Israeli aggression they encounter new types of wounds. The Lab explains it but it isn’t Palestine alone. We also witness a growing similarity between the operational mode of police forces around the world and the IDF treatment of the Palestinians.

Watching Yotam Feldman’s "The Lab" explains it all. We are all Palestinians. We are either occupied by Israel or by its proxy forces around the world - those who are trained in Israel and implement Israeli weaponry and tactics.

Further reading: Catch up with some history you were not taught in university. “Censored History” by Eric D. Butler.

Brother Nathanael’s Kapner’s interpretation of looming crisis: “Obama’s Jewish War on Syria”:
All the Jewish neocons are licking their warmongering chops at the prospect of yet another Jewish proxy war. For with Obama’s plan to arm the imported al-Qaeda linked ‘rebels’ in Syria, the Jews are expectant that the last Arab nation opposing their Zionist agenda will be destabilized by Islamic extremists. Caving to Jewish pressure, Obama propagandized last Thursday that Assad is using ‘chemical weapons’…that the Zionist-orchestrated ‘red line’ has been crossed.
[Clip: “White House aide Ben Rhodes just revealed a few moments ago that the US intelligence unity now believes with a high degree of confidence that the Syrian regime did in fact use chemical weapons, the nerve agent, Sarin, that killed about 150 people. He went on to say, he referenced back to last August, when President Obama, you remember, said that this use of chemical weapons would cross a red line.
“Number two though. Rhodes said that the US is increasing aid to the Syrian rebels and will provide what he calls military support. Republicans John McCain and Lindsey Graham weighing in as well tonight. They say they’re glad the administration now says that chemical weapons were used.”]

It’s deja vu all over again with Zionist shill Lindsey Graham touting the ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ lie.


The American politician and author Benjamin Franklin once wrote:
"Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
The suspicion of excessive surveillance of communication is so alarming that it cannot be ignored. For that reason, openness and clarification by the US administration itself should be paramount at this point. All facts must be put on the table. The global Internet has become indispensible for a competitive economy, the sharing of information and the strengthening of human rights in authoritarian countries. But our trust in these technologies threatens to be lost in the face of comprehensive surveillance activities.

The world has been scandalized to learn about Prism, the broad data surveillance program used by the US at home and abroad. German commentators say that both Berlin and Brussels must defend Europe from this invasion of privacy.

Revelations about a far-reaching intelligence program in the United States leaked last week aren't just causing problems for President Barack Obama at home. While American citizens are left wondering whether their privacy has been violated by the Internet and phone surveillance, officials abroad are expressing serious concerns too.
Germany, which has particularly strict data privacy laws, is reportedly one of the most heavily monitored countries in the surveillance program, and Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger demanded an explanation on Tuesday.

"The suspicion of excessive surveillance of communication is so alarming that it cannot be ignored," she wrote in an editorial for SPIEGEL ONLINE.
"For that reason, openness and clarification by the US administration itself should be paramount at this point. All facts must be put on the table."

Merkel To Address Issue with Obama
The day before, Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman Steffen Seibert said the German leader would discuss the matter with President Obama when he makes his first state visit to Berlin as president later this month. Obama has defended the spying program as a "modest encroachment" on privacy….
German Consumer Protection Minister Ilse Aigner has also called for "clear answers" from the companies implicated in the government document leak, and the Green Party demanded an immediate investigation by the German government. "Total surveillance of all German citizens by the NSA is completely disproportionate," Volker Beck, secretary of the Green Party group in parliament, said on Monday.

Strong Reaction from Europe
European politicians are also worried about the surveillance, which the European Parliament planned to debate on Tuesday. Officials in Brussels reportedly plan to discuss the matter with US diplomats at a trans-Atlantic ministerial meeting later this week in Dublin. "It would be unacceptable and would need swift action from the EU if indeed the US National Security Agency were processing European data without permission," Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian member of the European Parliament and a leader in the Alde group of liberal parties, told the Associated Press on Tuesday.

At issue is a large-scale, top-secret program, codenamed Prism, undertaken by the National Security Agency (NSA), an American foreign intelligence agency. It tracks suspicious messages from outside the United States that are transmitted through American providers such as Google, Yahoo, Facebook and Skype, including emails, phone numbers, videos, photos and other forms of online communication… The scandal has revealed state surveillance of a previously unimaginable scope by the US both at home and abroad, the latter of which is of particular concern to German commentators on Tuesday.

Center-left daily Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: "It may be that US citizens can defend themselves under the US Constitution. But that doesn't apply to foreigners. Facebook users in Germany have as little protection from the US Constitution as those in Afghanistan. Germany is the country in Europe whose telephone and Internet communications are being spied on the most intensely by the US. ... But even the best rulings from Germany's high court are useless because the majority of the Internet's architecture is located in the US. As a consequence, US authorities have the power of access, and this is stronger than basic German rights."

"The NSA case shows the expansiveness of preventive security state logic. Those who want to prevent crimes and terrorism -- whatever the cost -- can never know enough, and will always try to find out more in the name of security. Under the reign of terrorism, the legal system is changing. To track down the 'bad guys,' the entire population is being spied on with sophisticated methods in which intelligence agencies, police and possibly private networks are all cooperating. The US is a pioneer in introducing an infrastructure of surveillance."

"The only good thing about the NSA spying is that it exposes the principle tenet of domestic security that has been used to justify the rebuilding of the security system since Sept. 11, 2001: That those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. This is simply a stupid idea."



Isn’t it weird that in Australia our flag and culture offends so many people, yet our benefits don’t!


On Target, Dear Editor,
Please note the correct spelling … Sir Walter MurdocH, Murdoch not Murdock.
I read your publications with great interest. Keep it up!
Murdoch University is as you report, named after him. Sir Walter was a near neighbour of mine in South Perth and was a delight to have a chat [with] many years ago.

- - Harvey R. Everett, Ardross West Australia
Editor’s response.
Mr. Everett , thank you for your letter.
I seem to have a mental block when writing/spelling ‘Murdoch’.
I know it is spelt as you say, but I see I have spelt it inaccurately – once again!  


The Editor, The Chronicle, Toowoomba:
Dear Sir,
It appears the only people not calling for the resignation of the Prime Minister are the opposition and their leader. Some noticed this alliance before, when the opposition leader and a member hastily left the Parliament pending a division on the floor of the house. Had they remained their forced vote would have defeated the government, the main purpose of their presence!
This is in accord with all de-facto relationships where each approves of the other because of their actions rather than their beliefs.
Nearly a century ago President Roosevelt after suffering from such a de-facto defeat articulated what had happened to him in these words, “Nothing in politics happens by accident. Every political event is carefully planned beforehand”.
As those planning at the moment well know, it cannot happen any other way. Otherwise it is magic or some other phenomenon not arising from within men or women, but external to them!
How the Soviet Union leaders must be rejoicing as they watch us sliding into the one Party State, simply by default.

- - Yours truly, J. Brett Highfields, Queensland  

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159